Duy Nguyen <pclo...@gmail.com> writes:
> "read-tree -m" does not invoke diff, does it? If I went with my
> previous approach (modifying unpack-trees to ignore i-t-a entries)
> then this could be a problem, but because unpack-trees is untouched,
> merge operations should not be impacted by this patch.
Theoretically yes, but not quite.
I wouldn't be surprised if an enterprising soul saw an optimization
opportunity in the "read-tree -m A B" codepath. When it finds that
a tree in A and a valid cache-tree entry that corresponds to the
tree matches, it could blow away all index entries covered by the
cache-tree entry and replace them with B, either
(1) unconditionally when "-u" is not given; or
(2) as long as the working tree matches the index inside that
directory when running with "-u".
And such an optimization used to be a valid thing to do in the old
world; but (1) will break in the new world, if we drop that
invalidation---the i-t-a entries will be discarded from the index.
As i-t-a is not a norm but an abberration, I'd rather keep the
pessimizing invalidation to keep the door open for such an
optimization for a more common case, and there may be other cases
in which our correctness around i-t-a depends on.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
